Sure, there are always outliers and you can correct me if I’m wrong, but that’s just the overall impression I have.
(I wasn’t sure if [email protected] or this community would fit better for this kind of question, but I assume it fits here.)
Sure, there are always outliers and you can correct me if I’m wrong, but that’s just the overall impression I have.
(I wasn’t sure if [email protected] or this community would fit better for this kind of question, but I assume it fits here.)
I don’t care so much about the range of political views, just the quantity of them.
Too many people on Lemmy make their political ideology their entire identity, and it’s just freaking exhausting.
Can we not just be people talking to other people about cool stuff? I just get sick of political ideologies masquerading as people.
I find it highly interesting how in the replies to your message people are proving you right:-).
But fwiw, I do want to push back a little on my own irt your phrasing: perhaps it is not so much the intensity of someone’s views as the degree of welcomingness extended to people of all walks. Non-intuitively to some: this REQUIRES that we kick out people engaging in bad faith. However, once that’s done, shouldn’t we extend a welcoming hand to all who come in good faith?
Tbh I may not be expressing myself well there… so I’ll try with more extreme language: Nazis are bad, and thereby the Alt-Right that extends a welcoming hand to neo-nazis are bad, but centrists and liberals (both of whom would be called right-wing by many people internationally) should be made to feel welcomed? So breadth of political views - so long as delivered in good faith - not that the breadth is the thing desired, but rather the allowance for PEOPLE to come in and talk, if they want, regardless of their political views. The focus here is on the people - the tolerance is just the means to that good end (and this only works if we are intolerant to specifically those who are themselves intolerant).
Lol, what replies? I guess I’ve already blocked most/all the people I was referring to (or they’re on
.mlwhich I don’t federate with for pretty much this exact reason)When, out of nowhere, people put other people into boxes, ascribe a political label to them, and put words in their mouths without knowing anything about them, it is a HUGE turn off to me as far as interactions go.
e.g. A comment that’s taken out of context and the reply is basically, “Hurr, durr, that’s such an enlightened centrist thing to say. Guess you’re okay with a little fascism, huh, lib?”. That’s pretty fucking cringe and going to make me immediately block the person saying it (and I have and will continue to do so). Like, if that’s how their mind works, taking things out of context, jumping to conclusions, and projecting labels out of nowhere: I got nothing for them.
I’m not here with an agenda, I’m not trying to spread my beliefs, I’m not trying to convert anyone to anything (except maybe Linux lol), etc. I just wanna share and talk about cool shit.
And you know there’s someone reading this thinking (and possibly commenting) that the fact I haven’t announced myself to the room as a raging leftie means I must be a nazi in disguise. (Nope. Just someone who’s not here for political shit). My political beliefs and leanings are my own, and if they’re not apparent from my post/comment history, then whoever’s judging me just hasn’t paid attention.
As for how I treat people, as long as they’re clearly operating in good faith and with a good attitude, I welcome them until such time they’ve veered outside of civility or proven to be a troll, actual Nazi, or otherwise.
Exactly. Judgement is such hard work - best to avoid it when possible, but if necessary, not shy away from it either. Although in the latter case some WORK needs to be put in, if the desire is to do it correctly.
So many people claiming “bUt i WaS BaNNeD foR beInG ToO FrIenDlY, i’M ReaLlY sUcH a nIcE gUy”, when it is patently obvious to anyone who looks that that is not the case.
Then please stop by [email protected]
Subbed
Not sure if you’re there, but there’s [email protected] too
Yep, I subbed to that one when it moved from .world
There needs to be a lemmy.norm or some shit.
Just photoshop requests, memes, hobbies and dumb “askreddit” shit.
Discuss.Online seems that way.
Perhaps lemmy.today although that barely has any local content.
lemmy.ca? It does have a [email protected] but other stuff too:-).
Removed by mod
[citation needed]
Now listen here whippersnapper I’ve been around too long to not know that it is, in fact, helpful for your praxis to touch grass. Declare it political if you want, but don’t bloody talk about politics while doing it.
Read Clausewitz: Absolute war is impossible because for a people to turn all its efforts to war, it would have to give up the things that it is fighting to defend. War being nothing but the continuation of politics by other means, this also applies to politics.
It is you, here, who is trying to make politics an absolute war, you’re the one barging into a bar where people are singing the people’s songs and dancing the people’s dances and say “up, to arms! what are you dancing, what are you singing, you need to fight for your right to sing and dance!”.
In short: Your praxis boils down to party pooping. Don’t be a party pooper. Party with the people, then go back to your politics as others go back to their looms and mills.
Removed by mod
Tsk, tsk. Upvoting yourself from alt accounts is generally a bannable offense. I’ve reported you.
Note: You’re not being silenced for your opinion, here. You’re being silenced, if you do get silenced, for your abuse of Lemmy systems. I realize you’re probably going to conflate the two dishonestly, but that’s what happened.
Do you have any evidence?
https://kbin.earth/m/[email protected]/t/740517/Do-you-think-the-mostly-limited-range-of-political-views/comment/4095945/favourites
Note the upvote from his alt on programming.dev, along with two suspect upvotes from other @infosec.pub accounts at exactly the same time. The one from @lemmy.eco.br seems like it could be real.
So… you’re banned here? Why then do I see your posts?
Cut that victim complex and actually engage with what I said instead of complaining that noone’s listening when you say shit 99.99% of people here already know, providing not solutions but analysis that is so undercomplex it barely qualifies as soundbites.
You’re not being a revolutionary, here. You’re an angry kid taking their first breath, loudly screaming as to the sudden incursion of the real-world into your sheltered life. Plenty others have been taking breaths for long enough to not be screaming, but scheming. Get to that level instead of having the gall to say “when people ignore me then that must be because they’re billionaires”. Too easy. Suspiciously easy, don’t you think? How many people ignore you, downvote you, how many billionaires are actually on lemmy?
“Allergic to analogies” should be your username. I’m not reading that insipid wall of text when the first sentence misunderstands my very clear analogy. Of course no one mentioned banning me. Try to follow along.
You may want to have a look at the definition of “sarcasm” and “rhetoric”.
I explained, in detail, why you’re getting ignored. You still refuse to engage with the topic. Try to not ignore me, ignore others, maybe then you’ll understand why what you say you simply doesn’t resonate. It takes more than one person to vibe.
Did that non sequitur rebuttal make sense to you in your head? 🤡
lalalalalalalala I can’t hear you so I won’t respond to your argument (if you even made one)
Lol, say you are a westerner liberal without saying you are a westerner liberal
Congratulations, you found a very novel thought-terminating cliche. I’m impressed by your creativity.
you know absolutely nothing about us in global south.
Brazilian, eh? You mean the country with higher GDP/capita than no less than nine European countries?
Stop pretending to know, in any shape or form, what it is like to be born in Burundi. And don’t pretend you’re not a colonial state, you’re barely better than the US when it comes to fucking over the indigenous population and that’s not a high standard.
Stop pretending that 7:1 is an everyday occurrence and count those stars on your jersey.
It is interesting to me that the people who are PASSIONATELY concerned about the plight of poor people in the third world, spend so much time pushing the solution of not voting for Kamala Harris, and so little time pushing support for charity work, NGOs in the United States, supporting the rare tiny handful of politicians who actually do care about human rights, or similar things. I think the amount of content I saw from them before the election that was dealing exclusively with the importance of not supporting Democrats probably outnumbered the other stuff by about 10:1. I guess as long as we make enough Kamala Harris memes, the Palestinians will be saved. Who knew?
Well, it worked out in the last election, I can’t wait for everything to get better for everyone in Gaza. That’s definitely what’s going to happen now, right?
I’ve run into you a few times. Let me save us both some time with the bullshit lesser of two evils finger wagging, neolib.
Kamala in no way, shape, or form supported any kind of peace in Palestine. So I have no idea what you’re pretending about.
Did you even look at the votes in the election? Not enough people voted third party to make a difference in the results of the election. But sure, try to blame people that oppose the genocide in gaza. Sure…
That’s true. However, I think there was a massive propaganda effort, quite successful, to get people to follow certain antipatterns of logic to help get Trump elected:
And so on. It happens that foolish people on the left who thought that refusing to vote for Democrats was a way to help the Palestinians were one of the target audiences. But in the aggregate, I think the combination of those diverse populations getting suckered in their individual ways absolutely had a big impact on the election.
And please don’t say I am blaming the people that oppose the genocide in Gaza. I oppose the genocide in Gaza. Everyone on Lemmy opposes the genocide in Gaza. Because I oppose the genocide in Gaza, I didn’t want Trump to get elected, because he is about to make things much, much worse. If you have some tactical disagreement with how I want to oppose genocide, because you also oppose it but in some different way, then fine. But pretending that I have an issue with people who oppose genocide is just a dishonest strawman engineered in some think-tank somewhere, to help get Trump elected.
Yeah, there was certainly a lot of propaganda and lies to help elect Donald, but let’s be very real here - leftists not voting or voting third party over Gaza wasn’t a major part of his victory. Kamala Harris had a very weak campaign that didn’t address the concerns of young, white male voters. Personalities like Joe Rogan, Ben Shapiro, and others really do appeal to those people, telling them that they’re just fine and pointing their fingers at an endless list of targets to keep these people angry and afraid - and ultimately to vote for people like Donald who claim they’ll fix everything. I wasn’t trying to strawman but I have seen a lot of online comments purely blaming leftists for this election, and it’s frustrating.
What did I say, in my comment, to address exactly what you just repeated?
Specifically I’m interested in this part:
That had a very specific answer in the comment you’re replying to.